|
Post by joshuanickel on Jul 14, 2009 16:49:37 GMT -8
Here is what the city's report says about the schedule.
Storage Yard and Servicing 4:00 a.m. – 8:00 a.m.: Train operators arrive, pick up instructions in the operations office, perform a safety inspection and then move the train onto the mainline for service. 8:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.: Little activity occurs in the yard during this period, with 85% - 90% of the vehicles gone from the yard. Vehicles scheduled for work in the Maintenance Shop may be moved. Approximately 6 – 10 cars per day may be moved, where crossing Stewart Street is required. 6:00 p.m. – 2:00 a.m.: Vehicles return to the yard, stop at cleaning platform for removal of bulk trash and then proceed through the car wash facility. Washing may not be performed every day; on days when washing is not done, the vehicles are sent directly to a storage track. These moves from the revenue service tracks and onto a storage track do not require crossing Stewart Street.
Note: You are required to move across Stewart if you are coming from downtown Santa Monica into storage for the night.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Jul 15, 2009 10:49:15 GMT -8
There's also a new supplemental staff report that notes: The split alternative provides a complete linear buffer for the adjacent neighbors but is not consistent with the short or long term needs of SMC [Santa Monica College]. While the City Manager and staff have met with the College to discuss possible solutions, an alternative has not yet been found. Continued work to find a solution is in the best interests of the community and staff is committed to that effort. The City Council Wrap-Up following last night's meeting says: Exposition Light Rail Phase 2 - Recommendation for Alternative Siting of Maintenance Facility within the City of Santa Monica and Supplemental Report – City staff and Expo representatives presented an alternative the included using a city-owned parcel at 1800 Stewart Street, a Santa Monica College-owned parcel and a site currently owned by Verizon near Olympic and Stewart streets. Council also directed staff to continue to explore other possible sites. Council approved staff’s recommendation, as amended to expand the locations to explore for alternative sites and to ensure community involvement. So the Council is still looking for somewhere else, after both Expo and Santa Monica's consultants didn't find any. I don't expect any to be found.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 5, 2009 15:51:17 GMT -8
So, the alternative plan has failed and the Expo Authority is directing City of Santa Monica to have the original design on the Verizon site built. And stop asking for a "buffer" for Heaven's sake. The 50-ft-wide Exposition Blvd and a sound wall is more than enough.Start Planning Rail Yard at Verizon Site, Expo Officials to Tell CouncilBy Jorge Casuso August 4, 2009 -- After more than a year unsuccessfully scouring the Westside for available land for a maintenance yard for the proposed light rail line to Santa Monica, Expo officials next week will ask the City Council to begin planning for the facility at the Verizon property neighboring residents oppose. Expo Construction Authority officials said they will ask the council members to scrap their plan to split up the yard after vocal opposition from area residents and a key landowner at a council meeting last month. ("City Council Greenlights Alternate Plan for Rail Yard," July 17, 2008) Approved 4 to 2 on July 14, the plan would have used a city-owned parcel at 1800 Stewart Street and a Santa Monica College-owned parcel, as well as the originally proposed site currently owned by Verizon near Olympic and Stewart streets. "There was no support for the hybrid site as was being proposed," said Samantha Bricker, the chief operating officer for the Expo Construction Authority. "The concern was that (we would) pursue and environmentally clean a site that had no support. "We're all in favor of looking for things that make sense for our project, and this seemed to stoke more opposition," Bricker said. "I think the City heard that as well." Expo officials said they -- as well as City officials -- have exhausted the hunt for a property adjacent to Phase 2 of the line, which will run from Culver City to Downtown Santa Monica. "Unfortunately on the Westside, there are not many parcels adjacent to the line that meet the criteria," said Bricker. "We need an evenly shaped parcel" that is big enough. "The City hired their people (consultants), we hired our people, we searched everywhere and didn't find anything," said Rick Thorpe, the Expo Construction Authority's CEO. "We've spent over a year going over 32 different locations," Thorpe said. "Now I think we're at the point" of deciding on the Verizon site and start planning ways to make it work. City officials, who are in constant contact with the Construction Authority, said they are continuing to explore options, but are also moving ahead with plans for the Verizon site. "We're working on other things, including what the Verizon site would look like with a buffer and what kind of buffer we can get," said Kate Vernez, a senior analyst with the City Manager's office. The council's move last month to relocate the noisier functions of the Expo maintenance facility further away from homes in the Pico Neighborhood came after Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights (SMRR) -- some of whose top officials own homes in the area -- opposed the proposed Verizon site earlier this year. Opponents of the Verizon site called the proposed facility a "toxic triangle" and accused the City of engaging in “environmental racism,” warning the facility would have “many intolerable impacts” on Santa Monica’s poorest and most ethnically diverse neighborhood. But the alternative plan the council approved failed to please the two dozen residents who testified at the July 14 meeting that the "hybrid" site did not adequately address health and safety issues and that it would snarl traffic on Stewart Street. The plan also was opposed by officials at the Lionstone Group, a real estate investment firm that has a ground lease with the City until 2030 for the land at 1800 Stewart, a key component of the plan. College officials, on the other hand, said they are willing to give up the adjacent college-owned student parking lot if the City helped them find an alternative site. City and light rail officials said they would be reaching out to the community next Tuesday, when the council is expected to give the green light to move ahead with the Verizon site. The Construction Authority will hold a community workshop to gather input on how to make the site work, and officials have offered to give neighboring residents a tour of a maintenance facility that has operated successfully next to a condominium complex along the Green Line. "Tuesday will be very telling," said Bricker. "Hopefully we can sit down at the table and start discussing the issues" of placing the facility at the Verizon site.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Aug 6, 2009 7:55:55 GMT -8
It seems to me that getting things done in Santa Monica or the Westside in general is never easy and that Expo II will have more battles to come.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Aug 6, 2009 8:24:10 GMT -8
It seems to me that getting things done in Santa Monica or the Westside in general is never easy and that Expo II will have more battles to come. No doubt. This issue needs to be resolved and there will still be plenty of people upset about the at-grade crossings. Even though we have seen a lot of problems and issues in getting Phase I up and running, I expect Phase II will be even more difficult. The sooner the better any issues like this get resolved and construction starts.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 6, 2009 8:26:33 GMT -8
It seems to me that getting things done in Santa Monica or the Westside in general is never easy and that Expo II will have more battles to come. No kidding. On top of this we have the grade-crossing issues with LADOT, LAUSD, and NFSR. Hopefully this time Expo Authority will be both very careful and swift, and once things start rolling, there won't be any delays. In Phase 1 they were late in submitting their CPUC applications etc.
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Aug 7, 2009 10:36:30 GMT -8
The City is proposing a new alternative at their city council meeting on tuesday. This alternative includes just the verizon site and the Santa Monica College parking lot. It includes a 120' buffer zone. The parking would be located on the city property across the street in a parking structure. They will not know how the bike path will go until there is further study on the layout of the site. www01.smgov.net/cityclerk/council/agendas/2009/20090811/s2009081108-A.htm
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 7, 2009 10:57:53 GMT -8
Thanks for the link, Joshua. Here's the map of the city's latest proposal (compare with the earlier versions up this webpage):
|
|
|
Post by damiengoodmon on Aug 10, 2009 14:04:16 GMT -8
This one is going to be quite a ride. Getting on the train of environmental justice By Oscar de la Torre
August 7, 2009 In elected leadership, much like parenting, we make decisions that define our character. When making difficult decisions responsible parents and leaders weigh all options honestly and assess the long-term impact of their actions. An important principle that should guide our decisions is our innate motivation to protect our children and our community from foreseeable harm.
Elected officials must understand that when Santa Monica residents oppose the placement of a light rail maintenance yard it is because they already live in a polluted environment. Residents have claimed that if the maintenance yard is placed at the Verizon site it will create a "toxic triangle." Public comments made at City Council meeting identified the polluting facilities that make up the toxic triangle as the I-10 Freeway that uprooted thousands of families when it cut through the Pico Neighborhood, a recycling center run by Allen Company, the city-owned waste transfer station and Southern California Disposal, which is a transfer station that is used by several cities in L.A. County. Residents claim that all of these facilities have been spewing carcinogens and burdening families with noise pollution for years without any acknowledgment or assessment by our elected officials. Recent studies have shown higher incidents of asthma and other pulmonary related illnesses caused by particles from cars on the freeways, city dumps and recycling centers. And now they want to add insult to injury by placing a maintenance yard without adequate public process or an honest assessment of current pollution levels.
Our elected leaders must put the health and safety of our resident's first. The main quarrel lies in the failure of our elected leaders to assess and understand the real impact of a maintenance yard in a residential community that has already exceeded its environmental carrying capacity. I support bringing light rail to Santa Monica but to propose another polluting entity without first studying the current levels of noise and air pollution at peak hours is irresponsible and amounts to environmental injustice. Santa Monica residents deserve a public discussion on cumulative impact, a thorough analysis of the 40 sites reviewed and a tour of existing maintenance yards. Elected leaders and residents alike have a duty to demand the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making and this includes reviewing the criteria developed by Expo Authority staff to determine the feasibility of the 40 sites reviewed for the placement of the maintenance yard.
How can one ignore local demographics and studies showing that historically the residents of Santa Monica's Pico Neighborhood have shouldered the burden for the region's mass transit needs? Many residents and businesses experience the benefits of the I-10 Freeway but the burden of pollution that emanates from the freeway is exclusive to one community. Put another way, the wealthier and more powerful will receive disproportionate benefits from the Expo line and the less wealthy will receive disproportionate burdens. This paradigm must be challenged if we are to rectify the legacy of environmental injustice that has stained Santa Monica's image of progressive policy making.
As I put my son to sleep, the last thing he hears after I kiss him good night is the loud roar of the freeway and consistently I pray that his lungs will not succumb to the air contaminants that are our daily reality. And as one city staffer working in building and safety stated, "You chose to live there — you can choose to move." But if I had enough money I wouldn't be faced with contemplating this decision. And there rests the class issue that is also part of our claim of environmental injustice. Those with less wealth and privilege, political influence and in our case political representation, must shoulder the burden for society's convenience and access to mass transit. The goal of policy makers should be to encourage cleaner modes of transportation while addressing the historic injustice that these decisions create. We demand that governmental protection extend beyond historic landmarks and trees to the residents of the Pico Neighborhood. In a city where we pride ourselves as leaders in protecting our natural environment, we must not forget the human element.
As part of a public process that leans toward accountable, transparent and responsive government, we ask that our council member's direct city staff to conduct a cumulative impact study that assesses the current levels of noise and air pollution from the freeway and the three waste facilities located in the area. Santa Monica residents need to attend the City Council meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 11 to urge our elected leaders to stand up to powerful interests and not compromise the environmental protections our families deserve.
Oscar de la Torre is a member of the Santa Monica-Malibu Board of Education, director of the Pico Youth and Family Center and a resident of the Pico Neighborhood. It's been up 3 days and only one comment? Typically something like this would have been flooded with comments telling us how everything is fine and dandy and the concerns of the black and brown people are all overblown. Did you go on vacation this weekend Darrell?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 10, 2009 14:29:37 GMT -8
These NIMBYs live in million-plus-dollar houses in Santa Monica and still cry poverty and environmental justice. LOL
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 10, 2009 15:09:33 GMT -8
Here is a typical real-estate listing on Exposition Blvd across the proposed Verizon yard: Environmental justice, huh? According to whitepages.com, the NIMBY who wrote the article lives on Steward St but on the other side of the freeway. So, he is in reality would be in no way affected by the Verizon yard.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Aug 10, 2009 15:24:55 GMT -8
Damien, surely you and Mr. De La Torre know the difference between this facility and smog-belching freeways. Don't be intellectually dishonest. Surely you know that this light rail facility, and the trains it will support, are far cleaner than the tens of thousands of idling automobiles that park themselves on the 10 and 405 freeways every day, plus all that traffic idling on Santa Monica, Olympic, Pico, and Ocean Park Blvds.
You also must know that the site in question is zoned for industrial use, so that if it is not used for rail, it will be used for dirty industry.
If you and Mr. De La Torre are concerned about the toxins in the air, then you should be advocating for this rail line. The 10 freeway is the killer, by several orders of magnitude. You two might accomplish something real for this man's son by advocating for HOV lanes on the 10 freeway.
The man's skin color tells me little about his argument. So why do you bring it up? Is he a poor brown man with few options? Are you alleging that this route and this site has been chosen because it is populated by brown people? Have you not seen the alternative routes and maintenance yard locations? Do you think these other locations will affect fewer people? Fewer people of color?
As I tuck my triracial daughter in bed at night (see I can do it too), I will rest comfortably knowing that our region is finally moving toward policies that support environmentally sound rail transit and land-use policies. And unlike Mr. De La Torre, I won't be losing any sleep at all.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 10, 2009 16:18:17 GMT -8
Uh, the DEIR did exactly that study of noise and air pollution, and the Maxima Group did a thorough analysis of the 40 (yes, 40!) sites. City staff bent over backward to respond to objections, now on its third refinement.
This opinion piece is another example of rhetoric vs. facts. But the city wants light rail and the Council will move forward.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 10, 2009 22:13:22 GMT -8
As I put my son to sleep, the last thing he hears after I kiss him good night is the loud roar of the freeway and consistently I pray that his lungs will not succumb to the air contaminants that are our daily reality. And as one city staffer working in building and safety stated, "You chose to live there — you can choose to move." But if I had enough money I wouldn't be faced with contemplating this decision. You knowingly buy a house next to a freeway because it's cheaper than those away from the freeway. And then you complain that there is a freeway next to your house. Moreover, you say that you can't move out because other houses in Santa Monica, which happens to be the most affluent place around here, are too expensive! And you knowingly buy a house next to a freeway and put the blame for poisoning your beloved kid with exhaust gases on others.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 11, 2009 16:57:05 GMT -8
Wealthy light rail riders have won again
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Aug 11, 2009 18:30:22 GMT -8
Metrocenter, You pretty much hit the nail on the head. The maintenance facility has to be one of the cleanest things that would ever wind up on industrial zoned land. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any air pollution that would come out of that facility. Some noise maybe, but air pollution?
The NIMBY's always play every angle to make it look like the project shouldn't move forward, but it is always easy to see through the smoke screen. The fact that the writer is living in a $1 Million plus house makes it even more hilarious.
RT
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 11, 2009 22:59:03 GMT -8
After a detailed presentation by (Ms.) Pat Flynn and others on the study of 40 potential maintenance yard sites, quite a bit of negative public comment, and much discussion by councilmembers, the Santa Monica City Council tonight unanimously (6-0) approved a motion for the seven points of the staff recommendation, with the additions of " city-owned or controlled linear buffer of approximately 120 feet" in the first point, plus (1) Expo continuing its process with the community and (2) to also assess Site E201 (9th-Olympic-11th-Colorado).
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 12, 2009 9:12:00 GMT -8
and (2) to also assess Site E201 (9th-Olympic-11th-Colorado). You mean on the original railroad right-of-way off Colorado? That's interesting. I've been advocating for years that this should have been acquired and I made a suggestion that the yard could be built here... In fact if the line was routed through here, there would be no traffic impacts on Colorado either.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 12, 2009 13:01:16 GMT -8
and (2) to also assess Site E201 (9th-Olympic-11th-Colorado). You mean on the original railroad right-of-way off Colorado? Not exactly. The general idea was curves off of the Colorado tracks into the site from the north, crossing eastbound Colorado traffic, which was considered a negative. Another biggie is that it would displace some 19 businesses, which as Councilman Bob Holbrook noted, would "cost a fortune to relocate".
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 12, 2009 14:42:55 GMT -8
You mean on the original railroad right-of-way off Colorado? Not exactly. The general idea was curves off of the Colorado tracks into the site from the north, crossing eastbound Colorado traffic, which was considered a negative. Another biggie is that it would displace some 19 businesses, which as Councilman Bob Holbrook noted, would "cost a fortune to relocate". That's why a yard between 17th and 11th would be cheaper. There are only two businesses there: a small building for a media company at 17th St and a Mercedes - Benz dealer between 14th and 11th. It would be a long and narrow yard.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 12, 2009 15:16:22 GMT -8
That's why a yard between 17th and 11th would be cheaper. There are only two businesses there: a small building for a media company at 17th St and a Mercedes - Benz dealer between 14th and 11th. It would be a long and narrow yard. Don't forget it would cross 14th Street, and is likely not be a large-enough area. Another option for for the entire 14th-Olympic-11th-Colorado block was rejected due to proximity to Memorial Park.
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Aug 12, 2009 23:26:02 GMT -8
Here is an article from the daily press about the new location.
Another candidate for Expo maintenance yard emerges By Melody Hanataniwrite the author THE SPOT: An area near Olympic Boulevard and Ninth Street is being considered for the yard. photo by Brandon Wise. August 13, 2009
CITY HALL — There's a new contender emerging in the small pool of possible maintenance yard locations for the Exposition Light Rail.
That candidate is a roughly 13-acre chunk of land made up of two city blocks bounded by Colorado Avenue to the north, Olympic Boulevard to the south, Ninth Street to the west, and 11th Street to the east, all of which is currently home to approximately 27 businesses, including Jerry Bruckheimer Films.
It was included in a list of 20 properties recently evaluated by a city consultant who combed through potential sites for a work facility after Pico Neighborhood residents came out in strong opposition to a proposal by the Exposition Construction Authority to place the yard at the Verizon site, which is across the street from homes near the corner of Stewart Street and Exposition Boulevard.
While the survey concluded that the Colorado option would create safety concerns because its configuration would force trains to make a turn into eastbound traffic, the City Council on Tuesday asked its staff and Expo officials to continue studying it for different siting possibilities.
"The cost of relocating businesses to me is infinitesimal compared to the mitigated impact on residents," Councilwoman Gleam Davis said. "Relocating businesses to me may be very expensive, but it's not going to have a negative impact on a neighborhood."
The council also directed its staff to continue working on a newly conceived hybrid plan that would involve using the Verizon site, adjacent Santa Monica College parking lot and part of the City Yards, separating the facility and the residents with a 120-foot linear buffer.
Behind the buffer will be a car wash, storage tracks, train washing facility, and traction power station. The new plan would require relocating the bike path from the Expo right-of-way.
The hybrid option replaces an alternative proposal that city staff presented last month to spread the facility over several properties, including Verizon, the SMC parking lot and city-owned property at 1800 Stewart St. The plan was opposed by residents, Bergamot Station and the Lionstone Group, which owns the lease at 1800 Stewart.
Both the Lionstone Group and Bergamot Station, which is home to art studios and galleries, backed the new proposal, but the hybrid plan brought out a new opponent — the owners of the Lantana Entertainment Media Campus, which sits immediately to the north.
"We have grown in Santa Monica because tenants can work in an environment that is conducive to their business," Maggi Kelley, the general manager of Lantana, said. "It is important to us that we are able to continue the same quality of service to all tenants as we have been supplying to them the last 20 years."
Ted Bischak, the senior vice president of asset management for Maguire Properties, which owns the Lantana campus, said the alternative proposal provided the building a significant buffer from the maintenance facility while the hybrid plan pushes those activities up to the property line.
"The buffer for pedestrians and bicycles is removed and there is no conceivable way in our opinion to fix this," he said.
Rick Thrope, the chief executive officer of the Exposition Construction Authority, said that there is a sound studio located within 10 feet of the Gold Line tracks in Pasadena and that impacts were successfully mitigated.
Residents spoke against plans to place a facility near their homes, criticizing Expo officials for waiting until the previous evening to hold its first community meeting about the maintenance facility. Expo has pledged to hold another design workshop with neighbors.
Residents also expressed discontent with the screening criteria that the consultant used in its evaluation, which included weeding out properties that were too close to parks and schools and were under the adequate parcel size.
"I'm shocked and disappointed that neighborhoods are apparently not on the same level as schools and parks, neighborhoods that are occupied 24 hours a day," Michael Storms said.
Darrell Clarke, who serves as the co-chair on Friends 4 Expo Transit and lived more than three years about half a block south of the Verizon site, said the maintenance yard will not produce the same health hazards as the I-10 Freeway or City Yards, which residents said will join the Expo facility in creating a "toxic triangle."
"This is not a freeway with that kind of noise and air pollution," he said.
Davis pointed out that the Verizon site is also currently a maintenance yard that probably produces carcinogens.
"They are refueling vehicles on that site and there are few things that create more air pollution than refueling vehicles and they are not refueling them with clean air, it's gasoline," she said. "There are things going on at that site now that are probably having a negative impact on the neighborhood."
There's some skepticism about whether the Colorado site will be financially feasible given the relocation costs of 27 businesses. City Manager Lamont Ewell said that the hybrid plan is estimated to cost about $100 to $120 million and the Colorado option would be double that figure.
Councilman Bob Holbrook said he has a gut feeling that the site will create a furor in the city.
"It'll probably be $250 million plus 27 different law firms marching in here with all the employees that work in those places and I just think … that site isn't going to make it and to go down that long dusty road is concerning," he said.
This location is most likely be turned down before it is even looked at because of reloation costs.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 13, 2009 7:03:11 GMT -8
Thanks for posting that, Joshua, it captured the Council meeting pretty well. Here's also the City Council Wrap-Up: Exposition Light Rail Phase 2 Maintenance Facility Update – Exposition Construction Authority Consideration of Verizon Site and Exploration of Possible New Hybrid Site within the City of Santa Monica – The Maxima Group LLC., provided Council an update on efforts to identify alternative sites for the Exposition Light Rail maintenance facility. Council adopted actions recommending that the hybrid option be included in the staff report, as modified to include that the buffer zone is owned or controlled by the City and changed to be “approximately 120 feet; the staff and Expo staff continue to work with impacted residents and the site, identified as E201 (bounded by Colorado, Olympic, 9th and 11th) continue to be studied as potential siting options for the maintenance facility; continue to look for alternative sites for the power substation; and explore the possibility of shared parking with Stewart Park. Except for night noise the existing Verizon maintenance site likely has greater impact than Expo's would - including potential carcinogens as Councilmember Gleam Davis reinforced. Enclosure and buffers would mitigate noise. Rick Thorpe described the clean and safe quality residents will see on a tour of the Green Line's maintenance facility they're going to arrange. I agree about the 9th-11th site. To further analyze it shows they're not leaving any alternative uninvestigated, but its relocation costs and impacts would be huge.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Aug 13, 2009 7:27:17 GMT -8
^ I think a lot of the fear is simply fear of the unknown.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Aug 13, 2009 8:40:21 GMT -8
When I visited both the Red Line and Blue Line yards my experiance was that they were surprisingly tranquel places. I think metro/expo should organize a field trip for residents and businesses of the community so they can get a first hand look at what is being proposed. I think if they did a lot of their fears would be calmed.
It would also help them to have a better understanding of the types of activities that go on there.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Aug 13, 2009 10:21:09 GMT -8
I think metro/expo should organize a field trip for residents and businesses of the community so they can get a first hand look at what is being proposed. I think if they did a lot of their fears would be calmed. They're planning exactly that in the next month, following a first Q & A meeting with neighbors Monday evening (8/10).
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Oct 27, 2009 20:41:29 GMT -8
Is this issue resolved as of tonight after the City of SM meeting with the approval of the Verizon site + SMC parking lot for an hybrid facility?
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Oct 27, 2009 22:45:05 GMT -8
They are still discussing it.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Oct 28, 2009 0:09:47 GMT -8
They are still discussing it. They finally unanimously approved the staff recommendation with a number of added conditions just after midnight. It's too late to remember what they were; I'll post the City Council recap tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Oct 28, 2009 11:13:46 GMT -8
They are still discussing it. They finally unanimously approved the staff recommendation with a number of added conditions just after midnight. It's too late to remember what they were; I'll post the City Council recap tomorrow. Wow, that's one hardworking city council!
|
|